Evaluating Coaches

[lennymoore24]

I have always found it odd how head coach candidates are evaluated compared to players.  When a player is scouted, very little is thought of as the overall talent of the team around them.  It is all about their individual skills and how they project to the NFL.  But with a coach, it seems the hottest candidates are always coordinators of a top ranked unit.  For example, two names that come up wth year are Kyle Shanahan and Josh McDaniels.  Atlanta has been an offensive force this year.  But then you look at the talent they have.  Two very good running backs, three pretty good receivers, and an excellent QB.  McDaniels has Tom Brady and an offense that Belichick developed.  So I thought whoever is in NE as OC, they will be successful.  I know a big part is the interview, how organized they are, and their plans. I am actually a coach myself at a lower level of football.  But I think that is one reason so many coaches fail. Remember when GB had a great offensive season and Scott Philbin was a hot commody?  The list is endless of coordinators who didn't pan out for one reason or another.

I think they should develop a way at projecting coaches by grading the talent they have to work wtih.  For example, what is amazing about Belichick (as much as I hate the Pats), is he can take castaways from other teams and have them doing well within his system.  So the coaches that intrigue me more are coaches who get the most out of the talent they have.  For example, Chris Peterson from Washington and formerly of Boise State does a great job with limited talented.  So does Iowa's Kirk Ferenz.  

I think the second part of the evaluation is to remember that being a coordinator and being a head coach are completely different.  For example, Kyle Shanahan might call a great game, but if he were head coach he would become more of a project manager and his coordinators would likely call the games.  Of course, he might want to call offense himself.  But a great head coach doesn't always mean a great coordinator and vice versa.

So I am always wary of guys like Kyle Shanahan.  Is he simply the new version of Scott Philbin?  If he didn't have all the talent they have, would they be where they are?  I would say Pagano has to be judged that way too.  I doubt Buddy Ryan, at his peak, could do anything with the defensive talent we have right now.

So just from my experience when evaluating a coach, I usually go:

1) What talent did he have to work with
2) How did he do in years where his talent wasn't better than opponents?
3) If he was a previous head coach, how have his teams performed more recently with less talent?
4) If a Super Bowl winning coach, how long ago was that and with what talent?

So back to Pagano.  I think the problem with the evaluation of Pagano is that he took over a very talented Raven defense and held it down pretty well.  He didn't do a lot with little.  He had very little coordinator experience.  I think much of his evaluation is how players related to him and statistically how the Ravens did on defense.  But I think that is the wrong way to evaluate him.  The amount of talent should have been weighted.

[IndyD4U]

Paragraphs. Frankly I'm to lazy to read that. No disrespect intended

[dgambill]

26 minutes ago, lennymoore24 said:

I have always found it odd how head coach candidates are evaluated compared to players.  When a player is scouted, very little is thought of as the overall talent of the team around them.  It is all about their individual skills and how they project to the NFL.  But with a coach, it seems the hottest candidates are always coordinators of a top ranked unit.  For example, two names that come up wth year are Kyle Shanahan and Josh McDaniels.  Atlanta has been an offensive force this year.  But then you look at the talent they have.  Two very good running backs, three pretty good receivers, and an excellent QB.  McDaniels has Tom Brady and an offense that Belichick developed.  So I thought whoever is in NE as OC, they will be successful.  I know a big part is the interview, how organized they are, and their plans. I am actually a coach myself at a lower level of football.  But I think that is one reason so many coaches fail. Remember when GB had a great offensive season and Scott Philbin was a hot commody?  The list is endless of coordinators who didn't pan out for one reason or another.

I think they should develop a way at projecting coaches by grading the talent they have to work wtih.  For example, what is amazing about Belichick (as much as I hate the Pats), is he can take castaways from other teams and have them doing well within his system.  So the coaches that intrigue me more are coaches who get the most out of the talent they have.  For example, Chris Peterson from Washington and formerly of Boise State does a great job with limited talented.  So does Iowa's Kirk Ferenz.  

I think the second part of the evaluation is to remember that being a coordinator and being a head coach are completely different.  For example, Kyle Shanahan might call a great game, but if he were head coach he would become more of a project manager and his coordinators would likely call the games.  Of course, he might want to call offense himself.  But a great head coach doesn't always mean a great coordinator and vice versa.

So I am always wary of guys like Kyle Shanahan.  Is he simply the new version of Scott Philbin?  If he didn't have all the talent they have, would they be where they are?  I would say Pagano has to be judged that way too.  I doubt Buddy Ryan, at his peak, could do anything with the defensive talent we have right now.

So just from my experience when evaluating a coach, I usually go:

1) What talent did he have to work with
2) How did he do in years where his talent wasn't better than opponents?
3) If he was a previous head coach, how have his teams performed more recently with less talent?
4) If a Super Bowl winning coach, how long ago was that and with what talent?

So back to Pagano.  I think the problem with the evaluation of Pagano is that he took over a very talented Raven defense and held it down pretty well.  He didn't do a lot with little.  He had very little coordinator experience.  I think much of his evaluation is how players related to him and statistically how the Ravens did on defense.  But I think that is the wrong way to evaluate him.  The amount of talent should have been weighted.

Good point. I like to look at how players underneath them improve or how innovative they get. I also like to look at how disciplined they are (turnovers/penalties/mental mistakes). One thing I really really like are guys that can game plan from week to week to exploit a teams weakness as opposed to just a system coach. Don't get me wrong a great system is awesome (look what Peyton/Brady was able to do) but if you don't have the right fits the system breaks down (which is often the case rebuilding a roster)...also after a bye week or against familiar foes its easier to predict what your going to do and prepare for it. I'm not saying those coaches are great because they do game plan from week to week but they do seem to be flexible in calling a game and having their team prepared. I trust Kyle much more with this than McDaniels because well Josh has had Brady. Kyle though did a great the last couple years with Matt but he also got the most out of RGIII that rookie year. That has to count for a lot guys lets be honest. Let's also be honest and recognize that he and his father also identified that  Kirk was the better of the two qbs and really laid the ground work for bringing him along as well.

 

Negatives though is well we've heard reports that both Josh and Kyle can be very arrogant. I'm sure their success and the fact that one comes from football royalty also adds to that but I do think both have some issues that could arise from that. It is always hard to tell how these guys would transition from one roll to another but both have been around enough good coaching hopefully they would have learned a lot. They are probably a couple of the best at their job that there are right now in the league. Putting them on a team with a LOT less talent will obviously test them...but the next great coach is out there....and he probably isn't a retread of the same ol same ol guys that we see get circulated year in and year out. (Marrone, Fox, Cable, Ryan, Fisher)

[aReggie7]

I think you make a lot of great points.

 

One of the things that I think a head coach needs is a CEO mindset. What is their overall vision for the team? Are they a system coach or do they adjust to their personnel and evolve with the game? Can they manage and coordinate a staff? What is the tone that they will set for the team? I think a good head coach can explain (in crystal clear terms) what their overall philosophy is. There should be no ambiguity or inconsistencies. I say that as nothing more than a fan on here and someone who is not in a position to project someone's ability as an HC. 

 

A lot of the stuff I mentioned in the above paragraph is the stuff that Josh McDaniels is rumored to have struggled with in Denver. From what I read/heard about all he wanted to do was watch film/Xs and Os part of the job and not the rest.

 

I agree with looking at the talent a coach has to work with and basically see if the coach was able to maximize player potential. About every coach can take early draft picks and high priced free agents and get them to produce. (yes I know plenty of draft picks fail) It's what coaches do with players like Dion Lewis that separates them, imo. 

[twfish]

1 hour ago, IndyD4U said:

Paragraphs. Frankly I'm to lazy to read that. No disrespect intended

Then why comment? 

[Jackie Daytona]

All I know is, Indy sure seems to win a lot of games in spite of their coaching, and none because of their coaching...... maybe they teach solid technique..... but preparation seems weak as hell, execution oftentimes is not there, urgency sure isn't....... seems like guys know it's no biggie when they screw up, no fear of being benched, etc.....  aka accountability.....  when was the last time we out-schemed any other coaching staff? maybe vs. GB, or Minny?   When you have players saying missing the playoffs is no big deal, because it's the holidays, and there are more important things they can be doing..... that's not acceptable.  This staff has bred a culture of "aww shucks, we tried real hard"    

 

Could/Should the talent level be better?  Heck yeah!   but my god...... when does this staff ever seem to overachieve?  Dumb play calls, poor clock management, lack of situational awareness......  communication issues  (Chuck's we didn't mean to throw the flag to challenge, it just happened somehow, and they never were SUPPOSED to snap the ball on this dumb as all get out fake punt play)  Always excuses......  never accountability.  Tired of hearing Chuck tell us how great a team Jacksonville is every year.......  

[Jackie Daytona]

I may just be venting...... but hell, I am a fan of enough mediocre teams..... the Pacers, Hoosiers BBall and Football are more than enough mediocrity....hell, my Irish can't even achieve middle of the pack anymore......lord please don't let my Colts start settling for it! lol

[dgambill]

17 hours ago, Shafty138 said:

All I know is, Indy sure seems to win a lot of games in spite of their coaching, and none because of their coaching...... maybe they teach solid technique..... but preparation seems weak as hell, execution oftentimes is not there, urgency sure isn't....... seems like guys know it's no biggie when they screw up, no fear of being benched, etc.....  aka accountability.....  when was the last time we out-schemed any other coaching staff? maybe vs. GB, or Minny?   When you have players saying missing the playoffs is no big deal, because it's the holidays, and there are more important things they can be doing..... that's not acceptable.  This staff has bred a culture of "aww shucks, we tried real hard"    

 

Could/Should the talent level be better?  Heck yeah!   but my god...... when does this staff ever seem to overachieve?  Dumb play calls, poor clock management, lack of situational awareness......  communication issues  (Chuck's we didn't mean to throw the flag to challenge, it just happened somehow, and they never were SUPPOSED to snap the ball on this dumb as all get out fake punt play)  Always excuses......  never accountability.  Tired of hearing Chuck tell us how great a team Jacksonville is every year.......  

I definitely hear what your saying...and I agree with a lot of it. I think we could definitely get more out of our players. I look at our player development and wonder is Grigson that bad or do we just never coach UP a guy and turn someone into an all pro. It just doesn't seem to happen. Outside TY and Luck we just don't have a lot of guys that have made that next step. It could be who we draft or it could be the coaches just aren't getting it done but we do a pretty awful job of developing talent. The game planning and accountability I know lots of people feel that way so I'm not sure if Chuck will ever get there or surround himself with the right guys to achieve that.

 

One other thing that we discount a lot but we miss some real veteran leadership on this team. Sure we have veterens but I'm talking the Reggie Wayne, Jeff Saturday, Peyton Manning type of leadership that holds everyone accountable...pushes people to achieve more....put in the extra work to be great. Do we really think guys like Pierre Garcon, Dallas Clark, Julius Thomas, Emmanuel Sanders didn't get to the level they were without the time and focus to their craft that Peyton helped them focus on. The times he would have Jeff Saturday do a wet ball drill offseason workouts. It's been said many times the room almost straightens up when he walks in...people stop goofing off and know its time to get serious. I'm not there to say we don't have guys like that but I definitely think we could use some more. Let's be honest. This team is changing....even from the last time we made the playoffs. There is only going to be a few guys that know what the decades of success was built on or even what the playoffs feel like. When your draft classes are completely gone in 3 years and its been three since you made the playoffs the culture could very easily change. I can't say what the feeling and environment of the building is for this new group of Colts but I don't want to get so far away from success and players and coaches that know how to set it that we risk losing our identity. 

[chrisfarley]

22 hours ago, IndyD4U said:

Paragraphs. Frankly I'm to lazy to read that. No disrespect intended

http://ttsreader.com/